calscot

I'm thinking that with Barton and Rossiter as the main holding midfield choices, and with the lack of backup for CB, Crooks is mostly going to be playing in defence... When he gets fit obviously.

I think that an acceptable season would be second BUT competing reasonably for the title - ie not miles behind and get a win or two against Celtic. Third would need a sort of enquiry about the circumstances of it, but could be acceptable as a one off. Hearts showed a couple of seasons ago that sometimes a lower budget team can just click for a season and have a stormer. Usually, we'd be so far ahead that it would just close the gap, but at the moment a season like that, combined with some bad luck for us could have a team other than Celtic finishing above us. However, it would be something that would still mean the sack for the manager if it was repeated; I think finishing worse than third would too. I think the Motherwell result and general play in that game proved that we're no mid table team.

I realise the opposition wasn't of much quality in the LC but the way we dispatched them with a minimum of fuss, with the only complaint really being not scoring more than 10 goals, we seem to have progressed and moved up a level. Although we started a bit edgy against Motherwell, it was really only 15 minutes before we completely dominated them - and they are usually one of the better SP sides. We more than matched Celtic last year albeit under a poor manager, and a team where they under-spent, and of course, they were under a huge amount of pressure. Our additions, while at times looking underwhelming on paper, have really looked good on the pitch, and we seem in great shape. I think our football has really improved from a great start of last season, and we seem to have more strings to our bow while keeping a sense of continuity and togetherness. Celtic have a new manager and are already looking like having difficulty hitting the ground running, and I don't recall them having done that much in the transfer market. Again the pressure on them is far greater and as their fans are generally hysterical at any competition from us due to their new found superiority complex, I think it gives us a big advantage in winning psychology. The more they indulge in the new club fantasy, as well as seeing us as the diddy promoted side, the more they will go into meltdown if we show them we are superior. We just have to be careful of getting ahead of ourselves, and expecting too much.

I personally think there maybe a bit of money left sloshing around in the budget, and as winning at the first go is a bit of an ask, it would be unsurprising if MW wants to use it...

While it's a bit crap to think that a club our size have been lowered to what is at first glance, unrealistic dreaming about signing a guy who is at the end of his career, and currently playing in a far less wealthy country like Turkey, it could raise our international profile somewhat, and make it easier to attract higher profile players. Is it worth offering him a couple of million a year for a couple of seasons, to get people through the gates and raise our profile on BT Sport and Sky? That could also pay off in commercial income which I think is way under-tapped - when you consider that the likes of Dortmund bring in something like £260m from that department... Now Germany have about 16 times the population but they also have about 8 times as many big clubs - so how come we cant bring in conservatively say a quarter of that? Trouble is, a couple of million might not be enough if he's on the reputed 5m for two seasons. Can we do a deal for him to retain his own merchandising and endorsement rights (like you hear about for Becks and Ronaldo)? It makes no difference to us at the moment - which if it's legally possible and within the rules, currently gives us an advantage in that part of the negotiations. It all seems a bit of a stretch, and it's depressing to think we're stuck in the cesspool of Scottish football for the foreseeable future, while focusing on enjoying the new brand of football and hopefully being the best in a shit league, and putting the highly tainted number two team back in its place. I still think the England and the "Union" owe us an invite to a British league after their nefarious and ultimately hollow, "Better together" campaign. The irony is that Europe will be far kinder to English teams even though the English have unceremoniously given most of them the two fingers.

Seems to me that in the ground there are contractual obligations to advertise Sports Direct - onerous and probably virtually for free but seemingly binding. However, I think the Megastore one was more of a collaboration thing between the shareholding companies which we've kicked out and therefore have no obligations.

Burnley aren't the most glamorous of opposition to spark a sell out, but probably of pretty much the right standard to give us a very good test considering where we and Scottish football now find ourselves financially. I would like to think that we are at least competitive with the best the English Championship can offer, even with our paradoxically lower income. The Lancashire side have about 100m to spend but don't seem to have splashed out much yet - and I suppose as a newly promoted side, will use some of the income to pay off debts and some capital expenditure on the stadium etc - and maybe keep some for the future in case of relegation. And if we're counting friendlies, it's already five out of five...

I agree with Frankie's team to start with but there are so many interchangables I'd like to see whether they improve things. Think Fotheringham suits our style and has been reasonably solid, so deserves to be the first choice in the first instance, but would like to see more of Gilks to decide if he brings more. Like most, I like Tav coming forward but not defensively, so want to the see the potential of Hodson. I would start with Hill, but not sure whether Wilson or Kiernan should partner him, but prefer the latter as he seems to make less of the obvious mistakes. Would probably prefer another new CB to partner Hill ideally. But last seasons CBs are both still young and could improve massively with an eperienced partner and with a more robust and effective, defensive midfielder in front. Wallace is a no-brainer. Halliday could be swapped quite easily with Holt, and I think the latter is better at creating chances, while the former is better at breaking up play while still an attacking threat. Barton didn't come to sit on the bench, so he will be an automatic choice, but has a great understudy in Rossiter, who can come on later in the game, cover for injury and fully take over the role in a couple of seasons. I think we might see him a lot in the cups while giving Joey's older body a rest. Kranjcar is similarly a first choice to me, and I'm quite excited about him. I think Windass might be his direct replacement, and he has looked very promising. These two could be crucial in unlocking the better defences of the top few teams in the SP. Until we sign another forward, I think Forrester and O'Halloran will compete for the right hand forward slot. I'm not sure who is best at the moment. For the left, McKay has made it his own, and it seems we have excellent backup in Dodoo; however, he also seems to be able to play the other side and maybe in the middle too. So for centre forward, first choice currently is Waghorn with Miller as back up and super sub. However, we could be looking for a more clinical finisher there, and if so, I think Waghorn would take over on the right ahead of Forrester and O'Halloran. For the main squad, I think that just leaves Crooks, who might not get much of a game with Barton and Rossiter in front of him in the queue. That's two decent players for every position except for left back - where I expect Hodson can fill in.

Just as well I don't speak Gaelic then...

If Kranjčar is unfit, then I can't wait till he is. He seems to have the potential to have that exciting star quality, foreign player thing that we've missed for a while. Not quite in the Laudrup mould, more like Mendes, Caniggia etc.

Kind of typical unprofessional reply that shows that he's already tainted by the dark side. Can't imagine a son of Laudrup saying it like that...

I liked Alba as live, standard def TV is so much better than even a very good, uninterrupted, stream eg from BT Sport - especially since they dumped the old interlaced cameras. I also like to be able to pause and rewind when I like, then fast forward through half time and prolonged stoppages - or even just record it and watch a couple of hours later if I'm busy. With the quality of commentators these days, and their often anti-Rangers agenda, I don't mind the incomprehensible Gaelic... Decided I can't stand Chris Sutton - even if I agree with him, he's just far too arrogant and bombastic, and far too narrow minded to even understand the others' point of view, never mind see where they are coming from. I get BT Sport 1 on my phone which I can Mirrorcast to my TV, but I can't see myself ever paying for Sky Sports which would probably cost me at least 800 quid a year once you include the land line, just to watch a smattering of Rangers games. Makes a season ticket look like peanuts.

Yep, that's another bit of mixing it up I like, it even gives extra options like dummy shots that can get you past the defence. I agree some of the accuracy needs improving as you can't score without being on target, and if you are, then there is the chance of the second ball. I think I prefer a shot to be too close to the keeper than off target, but our biggest problem seems to be keeping it down.

One thing I've noticed in the last couple of games is that the team are doing something I've long been asking for - mixing up the great football on the deck with the occasional long/high ball, crosses into the box, and the short corners with the odd, old fashioned swinger into the centre. I think it stops us being predictable and getting repeatedly stuck in front of a packed defence. The good thing is that some of the passing accuracy and quality of these have been high, with a good completion rate. I think it's much easier to defend against one style, and harder when it keeps changing. We've had some effective attacks and a couple of goals from this and for me, it's better to watch as it helps keep the tempo up and increases the number of attacks on goal. The Stranraer players, looked shattered at the end.

Like I said, maybe it's just me, but I noticed him more when he gave the ball away a few times and looked a bit out of position a couple of others. After a while, I stopped noticing him much and I think that's when he was doing the job you describe...

We do seem to have a ton of options in midfield of pretty high quality - it's hard to choose a prefered three between them, but means the odd injury or ban shouldn't be a problem. Must admit though, didn't think Barton had a good first half, but maybe it's just me. Sutton kept going on about him being a different class to the rest, but while I think he has the quality, I don't think he shone in this game. Up front is pretty covered for players who create chances, but we need a deadlier finisher - Waghorn did grab a brace, but it maybe should have been a couple more, and he maybe needs to hit the target more often. Kenny came on and lived up to his pejorative soubriquet, he worked hard and got into good positions, I just wish he could finish like Boyd or McCoist - scrappy as you like, but in the net. He had at least two glaring misses. I thought Waghorn was a bit unlucky with the offside decisions, he had a fair few that were hard to call even with slowmo and freeze frame. But that's encouraging as if he just delays his runs by a fraction of a second, with a couple of good assistant referees he will make a killing from the offside trap. The old guard defence was pretty solid (for a change) but they will face far sterner tests, and that's still the part of the team I'm not convinced with. I think we have ok quality but not a wealth of riches. Maybe a fully fit Barton and a settled Rossiter will have a knock on effect to help change my view on that.

Looking at the squad, I actually don't think Thomson will get much game time - he has 8 players ahead of him for 3 places. I think there is a clue in the squad numbers, and if you have 30 or over, you're not going to feature more than a couple of times (except for Waghorn as he doesn't want to change from 33...) That gives us a more tangible squad of 21 core players with about 6 fringe youngsters and 3 out on loan. It's 2 keepers, 6 defenders, 8 midfielders, and 5 forwards, and so you can see why Warbs wants to bring in one more defender and striker - which agrees with what some of us said a while back. Must admit, I'd like someone new to partner Hill and another to take the centre forward position - of better quality than we have. I think Waggy is probably better used on the right, McKay is a shoe in on the left, and only see Miller as an occasional start with a lot of sub appearances. Dodoo could be that guy, but I was hoping for a bit more experience; I think he's someone to develop in the next couple of seasons.

I remember doing an internet search for tickets at Valencia, and seen tickets at way over £100 on sites like you mentioned. But then found Spanish sites selling tickets for about 15 euros... but you had to be in Spain to buy them.

While there was no takers, I would imagine there would still have been a bit of interest in people's minds - but in reality not many can just pop off to Malaga for a specific football match... Time, money and work and family considerations would necessitate some kind of once in a blue moon, happy coincidence for most - like the planets aligning and all that...

Can't see our academy U20s getting much of a look in again this season. I think Liam Burt is the only home grown teenager left in the main squad. Maybe Jordan Thomson and Jordan Rossiter will get more of a chance as they were actually brought in by the manager.

Do we know for sure that Tav can't play on the right of midfield in our system?

It was me who mentioned Tav in midfield although it was more a glib reference to the old discussion we had on Whittaker. However, it does seem logical that a wing back who can't defend well, may be better as a winger. The fact we don't have wingers in our system, doesn't change that logic. I also mentioned that Whittaker seemed to be coached well and worked hard on his defensive skills and positioning, which is something Tav could possibly do also. Our manager talks a good game with his references to "pitch geography" etc, but our defence often doesn't seem to be paying attention in class...

I do wonder how come our defence was so good with Weir in it but not so good with him coaching? I really thought he'd bring out the best from Wilson seeing as how well they played together when he was a teenager. Thinking back, I do remember Whittaker improving a lot under Walter, and you could see he was doing a lot of stuff that was coached into him.

Feels like back in time with the Whittaker debate - is moving him to midfield the answer?

Personally, I hope there aren't too many changes, three or four, or maybe even five, is fine but I'd like to see the team evolve into the preferred choice while also resting players and giving others a chance. I don't really think you can learn that much from two very different lineups and you don't end up with a settled side.